MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2085014138 · doi:10.7202/042591ar

La réforme des institutions centrales. Quelques jalons

2005· article· en· W2085014138 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Gérald-A. Beaudoin

Bibliographic record

VenueLes Cahiers de droit · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCanadian Identity and History
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHouse of CommonsSupreme courtGovernorDe factoLawGovernment (linguistics)Political scienceGeorge (robot)Representation (politics)House of RepresentativesLegislatureHistoryParliamentPoliticsPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

« In this article the author envisages and studies the reform of the Senate, of the House of Commons and of the Supreme Court of Canada ; the function of the Governor General is also considered. A suggestion is made for introducing a system of mitigated proportional representation in the House of Commons, as proposed by the Pepin-Robarts report of January 1979. The authors analyses the advantages and disadvantages of an elected Senate, of a Senate whose members are appointed by the federal government or by the federal and provincial governments, of a second House which would constitute a House of the Provinces ; the author is aganist an equal representation of the provinces in the Senate. Professor Beaudoin favours a specialized constitutional Court of Canada, although he considers that such a reform is very unlikely to happen ; however, he adds that in any case, the Supreme Court is de facto a constitutional court to a certain extent. He recommends that the principle of dualism be more visible. Finally, the author describes how the function of Governor General has evolved since 1926, and outlines the role that the Governor General may play in normal and anormal times. »

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.897
Threshold uncertainty score0.746

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0180.028
Scholarly communication0.0140.006
Open science0.0020.004
Research integrity0.0040.007
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.001

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.013
GPT teacher head0.245
Teacher spread0.232 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2005
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueLes Cahiers de droit→Same topicCanadian Identity and History→French-language works237,207→